Tsc - Future Of Train Simulator Classic Developer Update 15th March

The broken scripts on reload is not a DTG fixable problem, it's a design issue with the developer - they have stored values required for the script to work properly in script variables instead of using readable control values that can restore the script function to it's current status when you reload the save.

 

Most of the things you mentioned are the route/asset developers' faults. Nothing to do with the core code - you should not try and bend it so it works with badly setup content, instead the content has to be addressed - which is not the purpose here (and hardly possible considering the amount of data).

Ft Kent Black Wall has been adressed - issue of loading a GeoPcDx in RoadTraffic from a Provider folder that is not being preloaded. Simple fix to correctly add "IslandLine" to the route's Properties. This route was made at a time when there was hardly any 3rd party content available. The engine would search for any asset required in the scenario.bin and load them. The asset handling had to be changed when content grew exponentially to improve performance and telling RW what is needed and thus preload it. Black Wall is a special issue because of a recursive asset call. (Kent loads ScaleRoads which loads IslandLine - if you don't have IslandLine you won't have the bug, that's why it was not widely reported back then - you would just have less cars on the roads.)

The route's author, Richard Garber is very strict and does not allow any changes to his content - we need to accept that.

Norfolk Southern - can be played in the "better" No Career Scoring mode successfully. I still think the points system distracts from the gameplay. Can be turned off - that's fixing 90% of career scenario issues already. There is no career anyway and points and medals are for kids and won't buy you anything. (Of course it would be nice to have these updated for people wanting that medal, but that's another thing not of interest for an engine coder.) If you ever created scenarios - changing them requires full runs to test and make sure they're OK - extremely time consuming matter. DTG decided not to touch them - we need to live with that. We got the editor )

Couplers breaking - as I've been proving it's bad assets - these couplers would most likely break in real life too. No slack and damping turns the train into a single heavy entity instead of seperate weights which add up when the couplers are stretched - and the couplers are the weakest point of a train (by design).

And there is things people don't realize - I was just thinking how well and flexible the engine is that it still loads in scenarios after I change coupler pivots - as the consists now have different lengths, yet they spawn in correctly!

All nothing to blame on the game engine - I'd say these issues show that the engine is actually working and takes all these physics into account. Cause and effect - changing things here are potential game breakers, so I don't think it would be wise to do so (also considering that new bugs could then be introduced which would show up only after a long period of testing - better to keep your hands off and use the asset fixes provided by the community.)

 

I agree, maybe not with the last part, depends on how I read it.
I tried to use them as an example how the attitude has to change.

Like, imagine a funny scenario. From now on, only zipped content works. Mistake, but the perfect excuse to make it a principle.
Consequence? Workshop dead, 3rd party routes dead, self-produced content (build menu) dead, most old content is dead.
Fix? Easy, pack them to AP. Unless there is a principle that anything older than 30 days cannot be touched. Which actually there is.
Sorry, 150 DLC killed. You know, TSW3 just became so much more lucrative!

But, well, we can upload the entire TSC payware catalogue to Google Drive and since it's not sold anymore, it's practical freeware, joke on the publisher. But, would people accept it? Or worse, would people pack up all their assets? Na. They'll just leave a thumbs down: TSC bad, move on folks.

That's the kind of scenario people are afraid of.
Not to be nasty, but: reasonably. Alex might succeed but DTG has a proven track record of producing half-finished abandonware.
(Numbers are irrelevant. The BNSF storyline is a great example, it wasn't a big percentage but it was crippling enough.)

 

Not really sure what you are talking about

TSW is a different thing, it's a closed system. You can only eat what DTG gives you. TSC has always been open for anyone to develop content for - which makes it prone to bugs, that's just natural (Funny to see the amount of bugs the game developer itself has introduced in TSW, but that's another story.) Strange to see that people need to tell Matt what consists they would like to see in Scenario Planner, instead of being able to compose them themselves .

 

There is a section Backward compatibility in the article, and some people are worried what it may mean moving forward.
Historically, DTG would abandon any old content, and remove from store if broken. Instead, accepting fixes from contributors in such cases should be the way to go. The cathedral in the middle of the bazaar (Google if it doesn't ring a bell). Works well with VS, VSC, .Net, etc.

 

Some folks want it all doing for them - they use Youtube for entertainment instead of education and then there always "Read the Manual".
You only learn by trying to do something and that's the greatest feature of TSC - you can. I'm still learning and I'm nearer (much) to 75 than 74 and still want to do and learn.

 

Unless the company has suddenly been acquired by Elon Musk without my knowledge, I highly doubt that DTG is in the business of destroying its own valuable intellectual property. This is a conspiracy theory that not only contradicts all of DTG’s public statements, but makes zero logical sense.

 

Oh no, it was just a silly example like that!
They simply wrote that until now they weren't doing things in the name of compatibility but moving forward they eventually have to make some hard decisions. Such as with the DX12 option.
I have no idea what those decisions might be, so I just came up with a scenario that is easy to understand.
Yet again, the main point is to allow the community to submit fixes for anything that breaks.

 

Bring it back I say! It was epic! Much better than the depressing clanking and banging marshalling yard sounds we have now.

There was another version as well..

I prefer the first one's arrangement.

 

Meh, I'll stick with the clankings and bangings

 

I certainly hope DTG won’t do anything that’ll. Reat rw_tools.

 

You can have what you want already actually
https://alanthomsonsim.com/?download=train-simulator-menu-music-mod

 

I do music for a living, so i hate when having music forced on me when i try to relax. So no thanks to menu music for my part.

 

You can turn it off you know You always could, and still can. I wasn't suggesting that it's mandatory LOL. Just that if you DO want it.... the old theme is really nice, and missed by many.

 

Maybe we could put this forward as a suggestion? www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzWLoGdx3DE

 

LOL....
Meanwhile....
Sweeeeeeeet!!!111

 

^^ On this note, has anyone managed to change the background image in 4K without it looking blinkin awful? I like the look of that Pookeyhead

 

The background image needs to be 1080p, so the higher the res you run in, the worse it will look I suppose.

Thanks... can't beat a bit of 1970s class 87 action

 

Maybe i should do a free soundtrack for the TSC community.

 

Definitely!!! Train Simulator 2014 has my favourite menu music, it's so peaceful, lovely and nostalgic. Makes me feel many good emotions, I would love to have it back in the game!

 

Gosh those musical intros sound positively funereal! A bit too depressing for me, at least. Nice in another context, but doesn’t quite get me in the mood for some TS.

 

Great to read of the plans to keep on improving TS, well done, DTG!

 

There's a mod on ATS that lets you choose whatever you want. I linked to it earlier.

 

Always pleased to here the future is solid, and the improvments sound great.
One plea from an avid scenario writer, I do hope there are no plans to remove some, or all, of the command startline functions such as
- followme
-fpsxx
-jumpto
-enablebackups
-setFOV=XX
etc,etc, these are invaluable to help writers to find probems, fix AI movements, and overall check scenery and scenarios, as I'm sure you know.
Thank you.
John Rossetti

 

Can we have a brightness control in borderless mode please?

 

There are 3 things I'd like to see.

1. Once a scenario developer has completed writing a scenario, there should be an option to run the scenario in "Developer Mode" to test the scenario and save the results of consist placement. When a developer creates a series of scenarios, each consecutive scenario building upon the previous scenario, the scenario could be saved with its completed status. i.e. a string of cars is carried on a train, placed in a siding and then a cloned version of the scenario could be saved with that string of cars sitting in the siding in which it was placed. Then, when the next scenario is being developed from the previous one, consists in yards, sidings and on other trains still in the scenario would already be populated, including the car numbers, providing continuity between scenarios. Then in the new rendition all that needs to be done is change the load status of the cars that have been placed and any additional equipment being added i.e. through interchanges or new trains that arrive in the area. If a scenario was named "Train Run 1" the saved version at the end of the run could be "Train Run 1 Complete".

2. A few years ago, I suggested that a "Print" icon be added to the end of scenario debriefing similar to the the report that was generated in MSTS. Anyone that would like to keep "activity" records could either save it as a PDF or print it for their records.

3. Lights projected by locomotives. I find that the light cones projected by locomotives does not match that of prototype locomotives. When working with a scenario late at night, you can't see anything beyond the end of the locomotive. With prototype locomotives using a dim setting you could see for about 100 yards or more. On high beams, you could see for approximately half a mile down the track. There should be 4 settings on the locomotive hud, 1 front dim, 2 front bright, 3 rear dim and 4 rear bright, with light being projected as it would from a prototype locomotive..

 

I'm sure you can already do this:

1. Create your scenario as usual
2. Make a clone and load it into the editor
3. In the preview controls, press the small "Play" button and let the the preview finish fast forward. (this is the developer testing mode)
4. Press the big Play button - the scenario will be saved in its ending state - you can then create part 2 from that.

I hope that helps - doubt many know of this

 

One problem is editing a route or scenario is there is no alternative to Save when you don't want to.

Push Save and it saves a broken version - Push Cancel and you cannot exit the editing

 

Ideally there should be a "quit without saving" option, but for the time being you should backup the route before any editing session.

 

You can also press "no" and it will just load the scenario without saving it, then you can just quit.

 

I was thinking mainly about editing a Route
You go in change a bunch of stuff and then it does not work but you can only undo a limited number of steps

There is only Save or Cancel - no exit button

 

Ahhh... I see. You're correct. You only get the 'no' option with scenarios. I've not edited a route for ages. Good to know, and yes... a lack of cancel does seem particularly stupid.

 

Can't you just click on the "X" at the top of the window, and close the game w/o saving?

 

Yes.

 

Only if you're running in windowed mode. If you run in full screen, or borderless, there is no X.

 

Task Manager works in that scenario, though of course you shouldn't have to use it.

 

Windows key hover over the TS icon in your taskbar and click the X in the preview window.

 

They keyboard I'm using at the moment doesn't have a windows key

 

so this upgrade translation plan be like what trainz did from trainz19 to trainz:new era. upgrade graphics yet keep the old content running

 

If you are constructing I suggest you should be in windowed mode, it is much easier to find the right assets if you need to access them.

 

Why? Borderless would serve the same purpose. So long as I can click on the other monitor without the game losing focus, that's all that matters.

 

I wish this would be changed/fixed.AI Trains that stop at a platform marker should default to stop the “centre” of the marker instead of the end. It looks very unrealistic that short trains stop at the end of platforms. It wont break scenarios since the train will still be within a signal block.

 

That depends on the route...

 

This would require additional code. At the moment there is just one point for the game to refer to - the end of the marker. For freight, this is always realistic. For passenger this would need to take into account the train length. The stopping point would have to be calculated for each train and platform individually - Stopping Point = Platform end - (Platform length - Train length) / 2. Then an additional check needs to be performed, because Train length must not be greater than Platform length - in this case Stopping Point = Platform End.

I still doubt they will introduce gameplay changes. Reading the article - this is about pure code optimization and updating.

And it could break scenarios - as the timings can be affected. A train that starts further away from the signal will clear the block at a later time.

 

And still it will look way more realistic. So i say, code the code. It could even be a tick box in the ai spawn point. Stop a centre, stop at end. Let the user choose.

 

That's it, and it shouldn't be an actual problem. I think.
Sometimes there are mid-platform signals, though.
In any event, adding a property to the go via and load passengers instructions could be nice. Preserve existing default as forward end.
I can imagine the following states: forward end, rear end (when you turn around), middle, move not.
The last one is a funny if you add a specific stopping point and you could just board. Some places have markers to slip with the loco, for example. The other super obvious example is the start of a scenario.

 

Honestly I think the ship has sailed regarding the stopping points (or should that be "the train has left the station") on existing routes and scenarios in the way they've been described/thought out above..

BUT! What they could do is introduce track linked stopping boards (all current variations of and even hidden ones for Countries that don't use them), this would serve a few functionable roles in that it would show on the track HUD where your stopping point is (like how signals and speeds are shown), they would be a place that A.I. could be directed to stop at, and in career scenarios a place to determine whether a player train stopped at the correct point for their consist length (points for being on point so to speak), and finally they would be easily added to not only new scenarios and routes but existing ones too in the editor.

Also on a different but somewhat related theme, track linked whistle boards are a thing and have been for a good while now so why aren't they triggering A.I. trains to sound their horns?